The Egyptians, Norse and other Ancient societies believed in Nine Realms of existence. The first realm being the invisible God consciousness or matrix that hold the other eight material realms together. Of course the Norse had Nine Realms also. Sacred science is making a comeback on so many levels. It's quite wonderful to see and be a part of.
Good! no equations. Modern science totally takes the fun out of learning. I think the ancients did it right when they combined astronomy, art, biology and music as one linked together system of thought. This separate educational system we use today pretty much keeps some in the know, but most out. Modern science has it's own secret language that only they can understand. But what about those who'd like to understand it but numbers just aren't their thing.
Homosexual activists understand the power of words.
Please visit my channel to watch a one-minute video clip in which popular atheist author Richard Dawkins admits that homosexual activists "hijacked the word 'gay'".
The word "homosexual" is more appropriate and accurate because it, unlike the word "gay", actually describes the behavior/attraction/relationship being discussed.
The word "gay" helps homosexual activists push their agenda.
Collective unconscious spherical positron in-wave fronts multplying time enfolding at right-angle's forming building+/-breaking Spherical electron out-wave fronts dividing time unfolding at right-angle's.
Wave's enfolding+/-unfolding crest's of time-wave's
Perfect symmetry of Collective unconscious will be broken when two spherical wave fronts synchronize together forming+/-breaking opposing spirals from particles to sea shells from the rings of Saturn to living cells, DNA to filaments of space
'Universe is becoming+/-passing wave-centers of these Spherical Standing Wave Structures!
Collective unconscious spherical positron in-wave fronts multiplying time enfolding at right-angle's forming building+/-breaking Spherical electron out-wave fronts dividing time unfolding at right-angle's
Enfolding information is a Huygens combination as above+/-same below or Mind over matter
Collective Antimatter Oscillating equal+/-opposite -Energy=Mass dividing Acceleration of conscious crest's of time
"Collective unconscious spherical positron in-wave fronts multiplying time enfolding at right-angle's forming+/-breaking every point of space (virtual pair's) these objects are not in space, but are spatially extended, only appearing where they cancel out (now) the concept of zero." Wound-up inbetween Neutron star's and within the active cores of galaxies all in one+/-one out of all, matter is just space where it is very intense!, a fine mixture +/- charges coming into and out of existence."
You're all missing the main point: only what can relate will relate.All axioms found to be true within Elementary particle physics is a result of only those things that can relate. In other words, an egg crashing into a screen at almost light speed is eventually determined to have been an egg. However, an egg exists only because it fits within the very dance that precedes it. An electron is not always an electron as much as it eventually became one then becoming? Law of conservation!
Top class stuff, pure theoretical physics, like all pure theoretical science, really needs to be pushed forward by people like Lisi and others if science is to climb back out of it's current slump. This guy is what we need much more of.
OK - so the charge realtionship of the smallest particles can (or at least part of them do) "morph" into any of the larger particles. By looking at this he also suggests that there are missing partilce pairs/triads. Some have been suggested (higgs). What causes the particle cloud to become one or the other? Quantum mech suggests the observer dictates the state (which I take to mean something (be it something large like a sun or whatever) "wants" the cloud to become a certain...
@ered203 ...thing (ie lots of gravity pushes the cloud into becoming a gravity - bad example I know - Wow its hard to do this in a comment section). So if the observer dictates the reality, then which one of the missing particles is responsible for that? Where is Rod Serling's "Dimension of Mind"(ooooo...I'm playing, but...). He did say they interact with the strong force (probably), so that kind of means the atomic partices (pro, neu, elect) right? Just thinking out my ass at this hour.
so are the charge dimensions the same as physical dimensions? also why did he display the up and down quarks as 3 color pieces each. i thought they were essentially elementary?
@artofnick Physical dimensions yes, spatial dimensions no. I imagine a factory whose output is dependent upon time, number of workers present, number of assembly lines operating and product being made. This factory's output is a function of four dimensions.
@turbotroy6 given that logic, why try to perfectly cure any disease? the more we learn about out world and higher order concepts, the more we learn about lower organization concepts. i beleive a theroy of everything isnt impossible to find and will have a beneficial impact on society
@IloveJesusYesId0 I think he's speaking to an issue that has yet still been ignored up unto this point. Some, and I'm not saying all, of the problems that physics is having is due to the stagnation of real progress for a steady pay check. Even if they know a theory has reached the end of its rope, like String Theory, because the money is in String Theory, they stay there and play with their thumbs. I think he's saying that a balanced like would lead to more progress in the field of physics.
@MobiusCoin String theory is insanity, gone so so so far without yet any way to prove anything. How about looking at quantum mechanics, something seems wrong with our basic understandings, it should tie in intimately to relativity and everything else.
@Stepstoneau String theory IS a relativistic quantum theory. It's just a relativistic quantum theory with a more general local SO(d - 1, 1) invariance than the SO(3, 1) Lorentz invariance of ordinary quantum field theory with point particles.
the expansion of the universe DID point them to us...Galileo got a raw deal? Not really, he just got a B...I feel bad for experimental physicists and mathematicians...
@Gytax0 Sure. It violates the Coleman Mandula theorem, which is fatal by itself but moreover the E8 has no complex representations which are necessary to make a chiral gauge theory, like the standard model. If you want a very solid footnote look here, arxiv,org/abs/0905,2658 but you really dont even need this much text to establish it. You can also see a real physicist hopelessly trying to explain this in a comment debate here: bit,ly/prHAXR (change all the commas to dots in the links)
This is in the book titled The Last Universe, which is a fictional story as well. It's exciting and interesting, flipping between the unbelievable and the completely reliable.
I guess my biggest difficulty with this is the more-than-four dimensional requirements. I agree with the voices that argue that a thoroughly correct proposition will be expressible in four dimensions only. I can't really give a scientific proof for this, it's just intuitive. Again, my mind is no equal to those like Garret's! I, too, hope this theory is proven correct in concept.
True, his assumption is a problem. But hopefully we'll know one way or the other soon enough. It would be great if this 'beautiful' concept was proved though. It makes more sense as a theory than any other I've heard.
I think he's onto something, but he's wrong about all 248 generators being particles. Maybe reconsider particular subset(s) - there isn't room for functionality... all fermions have to come from eigenspace, which appears to be insufficient in this model.
Perhapse even new attoms emerge from the continued disruption of the valences, and disruption of the polarity therin, because of the 8 dimentional rotation of the E8 as it redefines harmony with its surroundings. This is the foundation of physical evolution. Now, the hard part is discovering the quantum physics involving a non-physical existance...
E8 is an evolutionary particle. It explains how a single particle can be everything. It is the universal particle which constructs everything. We just need the Higgs particle to finish the equation. The question is, if the particle can change its form, then all matter could transform itself into any compilation of existing matter or structure for that matter. When a chemical reaction happens, not only are the attoms exchanging anions and cations to form new molecules.
The difference between Lisi's E8 theory and String theory is that he has testable hypotheses. He predicts the existence of new particles, many of which may emerge from LHC. String theory is currently just sexy math, with no hope of experimental confirmation in the foreseeable future.
@goffperu I doubt that he'll continue with the prediction of new particles. His assumption that all 248 generators are particles is just that - an assumption.
@TheProdigySupreme Yeah you're right. I didn't mean to come off as a know it all. Garret's work is truly brilliant. I can't compete with this kind of work. I was actually stating this in defense of his position - to illustrate that just because the eigenspace is insufficient for the fermions if all the generators are particles doesn't mean his idea is a bust. Like I said I think he's clearly onto something here. I've been a big fan of geometric solutions ever since I read Bucky Fuller!
@OldSchoolSkill I just hope this isnt the case of building maths to support your conclusion. He seems very grounded in this aspect, but temptation to make the picture work when its soooooooo close is soooooo strong. It is very compelling, Ive some Papers and Journals to read. String theory is sooo very elegant, but itseems to pop up 3 problems for every 1 or 2 solved. Its gonna be that way for this guy.
If it were easy, it'd been solved long, long ago..
You did not talk about the calcium carbonate chemical bonds involved in making of corals. Do you understand the chemistry of coral making crystallography of chemical bonding of carbonates?
@giuseppe3010 the video is about cutting-edge theoretical physics, not about the chemical bonds of coral. He uses coral as an analogy, but there is no need to go in-depth about coral when clearly that is not the focus of the talk.
Or did you just want to impress us with your fancy calcium carbonate chemical bond talk?
You dont need the lottery!!first look for him and once you found him, give him what you can!! it's easy to say words like the lottery shit, act now if you believe in something!!!!!!
i like this. but it is hard to understand. i understood the concepts about the coral, but the particle patterns were confusing. is there another place this is talked about? i may just need another type of description...
I love researching things like this and listening to people like Lisi, but I really have to wonder... how do people with such a remarkable level of intelligence look at the world, as opposed to most people of normal intelligence? I don't consider myself stupid by any means, but to compare my intellectual abilities to those of someone like Garrett Lisi is just ridiculous. But it's these rare gems of super intelligence that are required to keep moving our species forward. Best of luck to him.
@OldSchoolSkill I can't really comment on the hypothesis because I don't fully understand it, but the photos about his life felt just out of place in this lecture. I don't care about whether or not he lives his life like a 90s college movie.
Some nice visualizations, but have no illusions: Garrett's "theory" is completely at odds with established physics. It has been debunked. Among other problems, it is unable to reproduce chirality. It is not "controversial" among people who understand how symmetry is implemented in physics.
lol At the end, he's asking Lisi for a shape of a particle (electron), but Lisi is saying each subatomic particle has a shape as defined by the E8 structure as it rotates...but also notes that subatomic particles are represented as points. If you're simple-minded, each particle (including the electron) is a point. If you want more clarity, watch the E8 rotation video on Wikipedia...under Exceptionally Simple (ToE). It's still a work-in-progress.
wait until you're smart enough? You must have the intellectual capability, to understand this in the first place. Just study the symbols, watch lectures, in which it is explained in mathmatical form. Like Richard Feynmann said; there are no "wonder-people", you need to be very interested and very curious, then anyone can do these things. But not many people want to spend so much time on something they don't really like.
@Jipzorowns lol trust me, im doing my best to try and take this in... I haven't started uni yet, nor A-levels, so im used to the lower level stuff, I mean this stuff is really cool, It just confuses me more than anything really :|
Its all just cause and effect to me. Karma is all there is, was, or ever will be. Sustainability of the ecosystem is dependent on understanding this fact and the fact that everything effects and is dependent on everything else. Using simple physics is the key to a peaceful harmonious existence. This is what spiritual masters have been teaching for thousands of years.
@pr4nk5tr If the fourth dimension is time, then you can do it easily. However if you take the 4th dimension as a space dimension (x, y, z, w) then you have a real problem. You can try to imagine a four dimensional cube by looking at projections into 3d from different angles (like shades of a wireframe cube on a piece of paper). Other than that the brain has no intrisic mechanism to imagine these things. With math you don't really need to... look at the equations =)
@pr4nk5tr You don't imagine a shape with eight dimensions. Quite literally, no human being will ever be able to see more than three dimensions. That's how the world has shaped our brains and evolution. We only require three dimensions, so we only see three dimensions.
But, seeing these extra dimensions isn't required in order to do the math. :)
Strange if the standard model is broken,then maybe this model is just that to and should have been accepted.Since we are E8 but in stringtheory was created by a collision of branes(universa) maybe our E8 has collided or are sharing its particle that our imagineless scientist denys with a another E-shape thus rendering the missing partical's invinsible and impossible to us to detect.
This reminds me of my college physics labs. We'd do something crazy like calculate the mass of the earth using calculus and then verify it with some crazy experiment.
I haven't watched this video yet for my own personal reasons, but I have a question.
The screen at 00:24, what are those equations at the bottom? Can those equations be recognized as a significant part of this theory? Because they would look good on my arm.
When I was 20 I knew intuitively that time is not part of space. It took me 32 years to understand rationally that according to mathematical formalism X4 = ict time is numerical order of photon motion in 4D space.
Perhaps the reason this Big Bang Theory is so widely held is because it does conjure up so many abstract theorys trying to explain it,when filamentary theory is a relatively simple process of particle collision and radiation creating magnetic fields of fusion.Think about it, im a physicist and me or one of my colleagues has finally figured out the Grand Theory of Everything.yay,Nobel prize,party!,now what?
I beleive life can only exist on a planet if the amount of electromagnetivity its getting, based on its position in the stars magnetic field,allows for all three elementary forms to exist;gas,liquid,and solid or where they all fit in evenly
The leftover elements then relatively quickly get caught in the magnetic fields of newly forming stars whilse being pulled toward the galaxy's SMBH the amount of radiation however would not allow these elements to actually enter the black hole.The collision points of these atoms with the radiation from the star would cause planets to form.And if these molecules form the rite densitys based on how much solar radiation they receive,they start life
Then when the star reaches the end of its galactic arm the magnetic field collapses while its new neutron infused atoms are blasted into and held in the magnetic field because of their neutrons,these are the other elements.As the stars magnetic field collapses it immediately begins fusing the electrons with the particles and becomes a quasar(protogalaxy) repeating the eternal process.
i personally beleive in a universe where particales(dark matter)lol are colliding at a point between 3 seperate voids producing electrons(radiation) which immedately collide with and condense incoming particles from the void into pools of H1 which immedately start emitting radiation from the friction of colliding Protons & Electrons in their black holes,the outgoing radiation then collides and fuses with incoming H1 creating stars.These star then create their own magnetic fields(gravity)
This is the first I've heard about this theory. Very intriguing. I've heard much more about Superstring theory but immediately this one makes more sense to me.
What I got from this was that all these particles are kind of like on a big die and depending how it is rolled we see what lands on top. who is rolling the die?
very interesting,maybe i misunderstood .at the end it seemed like he just repeated what einstien said about space being nothing and this nothing has a geometric shape that can be bent curved and warped?thereby giving rise to the universe and all the forces and particles that comprise our existence.dosen,t getting somthing from nothing violate all known laws of physics?
believe I know something about this anomaly and its known as quantum weirdness. Energy is propagated through space as a wave and a particle depending upon which way an observer views it. Its as if one's way of observing something effects its property. I will look up this subject " wave particle duality" and see if it clarifies things for me since I'm a bit at a loss understanding this concept.
Regardless of the E8 theory being valid or not, this was a beautifull talk with a great simplifying visualization of mindblowing complex mathematics. I'm not that great at math myself, and the most complex things i've been working with has been 5-dimentional, which is great fun when you can visualize with graphs or diagrams in multidimentional space.
When i get actual formal competence in the fields i've been playing with, i hope i'll have a greater understanding and appreciation of it.
Interesting but this guy is not a good speaker. I don't like how he reads and he shouldn't actually read. None of those physicist who explain things on youtube read.
@GShock112 Imagine standing in front of not only scientific peers, but the world on camera and probably given instructions to make the speech reasonably simple, would you be nervous if your not a natural speaker? I would be....
I think he does a good job of "simplifying" as good as he can to dumb it down for the general net populous.
Oh but I understand I didn't say he's not a good teacher I said he's not a good speecher. Besides he really reads too fast. He has a plan but he doesn't seem to look at the audience's faces to find out whether they understand him or not... he just follows his written plan. The theory is incredibly nice but you know... we're getting to the point of nowhere IMO. We need scientific experiments to prove theories.
i wonder what his archivement is: was he the frist to apply E8 to elementary particles? or has he only done the part with the colourful circles, triangles, squares and the projection of E8 roots?
To me applying particles to E8 is like trying to make an argument for the square tire. Sure, you could make one, and it might work, but not nearly as well as the round ones. Think I'll stick with the round ones. Lee Smolin is an embarassing scientist for having endorsed this.
@BataFatCat I was thinking about your question. This theory deals with elementry particles... the building blocks of matter...but since the particles are invisible they are portrayed as shapes and colors as representation of those particles. This theory uses various shapes and colors to describe whats happening at a quantum level. But string theory uses vibrations of a string to describe whats happening at a quantum level. maybe both theories are compatible one using shape/color the other sound
His hypothetical model -- not a theory, as falsely labeled -- was refuted by two physicists in early 2010. This is a dead end. This guy can sell books though. There are enough retarded people to buy them.
@zzzIdividedbyzerozzz o yeah... sorry. I didn't want to be accused of spam...just replace the space between sciencedaily and com with a period...here it is correctly:
@LogicalFlawDetector i thought it was one mathematician Skip Garibaldi who did the refutation. its trivial to argue this point but I do think credit it due where deserved. please tell me the name of the physicists who also did this, I want to read their paper
@BataFatCat . Same reason why they can't mix religion with science. Because people don't want to. people can't understand that there are different paths to the truth. And maybe they will all go to the same spot at the end, they only take a different way. Im a religious Scientist. People think its stupid and that it cannot be put together. Everything is possible and nothing can happen. Only we humans are too ignorant.
@nexenta It almost reads as you're trying to claim that god; an unproven concept that is found in the most primitive societies (which BTW people who believe in the existents of such a mythical creature, can't even define it consistently). This god thing, is somehow responsible to the process that created the diversity of life on earth?
Go to church (or madhouse your choice) and stop bothering us with this nonsense.
@Zeharit Religion and science is like going to AA and after that to the bar. =D You can't be truly scientific, and religious... at most agnostic (of course I thought that your religion is based on some superstitious beings or garden gnomes or some other Zeus like figure).
nosebleeeeeeeeeeeeedddd! :D
istonene 1 week ago
You can see so much Sacred Geometry in the patterns around 12 & 13 minutes...
Thnkabtit34 1 week ago
The Egyptians, Norse and other Ancient societies believed in Nine Realms of existence. The first realm being the invisible God consciousness or matrix that hold the other eight material realms together. Of course the Norse had Nine Realms also. Sacred science is making a comeback on so many levels. It's quite wonderful to see and be a part of.
knossis1 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Good! no equations. Modern science totally takes the fun out of learning. I think the ancients did it right when they combined astronomy, art, biology and music as one linked together system of thought. This separate educational system we use today pretty much keeps some in the know, but most out. Modern science has it's own secret language that only they can understand. But what about those who'd like to understand it but numbers just aren't their thing.
knossis1 1 week ago
Comment removed
knossis1 1 week ago
Comment removed
FloridaRaider 2 weeks ago
ummm, what did he say???
IngeniousMrToad 3 weeks ago
The universe is a fractal flowing torus of light energy.
AvatarRoku1 1 month ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
Homosexual activists understand the power of words.
Please visit my channel to watch a one-minute video clip in which popular atheist author Richard Dawkins admits that homosexual activists "hijacked the word 'gay'".
The word "homosexual" is more appropriate and accurate because it, unlike the word "gay", actually describes the behavior/attraction/relationship being discussed.
The word "gay" helps homosexual activists push their agenda.
lightandbeautiful 1 month ago
Your video is popular on Saint John's
urtismcdona13c 1 month ago
Your vid is popular on Armenia
urtismcdona13c 2 months ago
Collective unconscious spherical positron in-wave fronts multplying time enfolding at right-angle's forming building+/-breaking Spherical electron out-wave fronts dividing time unfolding at right-angle's.
Wave's enfolding+/-unfolding crest's of time-wave's
Perfect symmetry of Collective unconscious will be broken when two spherical wave fronts synchronize together forming+/-breaking opposing spirals from particles to sea shells from the rings of Saturn to living cells, DNA to filaments of space
KorrazonCold 2 months ago 2
'Universe is becoming+/-passing wave-centers of these Spherical Standing Wave Structures!
Collective unconscious spherical positron in-wave fronts multiplying time enfolding at right-angle's forming building+/-breaking Spherical electron out-wave fronts dividing time unfolding at right-angle's
Enfolding information is a Huygens combination as above+/-same below or Mind over matter
Collective Antimatter Oscillating equal+/-opposite -Energy=Mass dividing Acceleration of conscious crest's of time
KorrazonCold 2 months ago
"Collective unconscious spherical positron in-wave fronts multiplying time enfolding at right-angle's forming+/-breaking every point of space (virtual pair's) these objects are not in space, but are spatially extended, only appearing where they cancel out (now) the concept of zero." Wound-up inbetween Neutron star's and within the active cores of galaxies all in one+/-one out of all, matter is just space where it is very intense!, a fine mixture +/- charges coming into and out of existence."
KorrazonCold 2 months ago
Comment removed
jackeatsfish 2 months ago
@jackeatsfish What is reality? It is only what you percept it to be.
Koensol 2 months ago
You're all missing the main point: only what can relate will relate.All axioms found to be true within Elementary particle physics is a result of only those things that can relate. In other words, an egg crashing into a screen at almost light speed is eventually determined to have been an egg. However, an egg exists only because it fits within the very dance that precedes it. An electron is not always an electron as much as it eventually became one then becoming? Law of conservation!
jackeatsfish 2 months ago
Comment removed
unhealthytruthseeker 3 months ago
Too bad it violates the Coleman-Mandula theorem.
unhealthytruthseeker 3 months ago
wow! at about 12:00 in it looks just like a hexagram, maybe the kabbalah was right as he said the same thing they claimed.
GalinorGustave2 3 months ago
Top class stuff, pure theoretical physics, like all pure theoretical science, really needs to be pushed forward by people like Lisi and others if science is to climb back out of it's current slump. This guy is what we need much more of.
TheNZNick 3 months ago
OK - so the charge realtionship of the smallest particles can (or at least part of them do) "morph" into any of the larger particles. By looking at this he also suggests that there are missing partilce pairs/triads. Some have been suggested (higgs). What causes the particle cloud to become one or the other? Quantum mech suggests the observer dictates the state (which I take to mean something (be it something large like a sun or whatever) "wants" the cloud to become a certain...
ered203 3 months ago
@ered203 ...thing (ie lots of gravity pushes the cloud into becoming a gravity - bad example I know - Wow its hard to do this in a comment section). So if the observer dictates the reality, then which one of the missing particles is responsible for that? Where is Rod Serling's "Dimension of Mind"(ooooo...I'm playing, but...). He did say they interact with the strong force (probably), so that kind of means the atomic partices (pro, neu, elect) right? Just thinking out my ass at this hour.
ered203 3 months ago
It's too bad that the Higgs most likely doesn't exist.
CannibalisticKoala 4 months ago
so are the charge dimensions the same as physical dimensions? also why did he display the up and down quarks as 3 color pieces each. i thought they were essentially elementary?
artofnick 4 months ago
@artofnick Physical dimensions yes, spatial dimensions no. I imagine a factory whose output is dependent upon time, number of workers present, number of assembly lines operating and product being made. This factory's output is a function of four dimensions.
SonOfNye 3 months ago
"it's the most beautiful 8-dimensional model of elementary particles and forces you've ever seen."
it's the only one ive ever seen.
Aldelirium 4 months ago
@Aldelirium calabi yau is another
artofnick 4 months ago
@turbotroy6 given that logic, why try to perfectly cure any disease? the more we learn about out world and higher order concepts, the more we learn about lower organization concepts. i beleive a theroy of everything isnt impossible to find and will have a beneficial impact on society
positronicum97 4 months ago
@turbotroy6 i still think that pure curiosity based research is important, as of course is researching cures for diseases
positronicum97 4 months ago
My head is boiling
sirArchitect 5 months ago
He said beauty 15 times.
ChrisL4384 5 months ago
This being a "good life" is extremely subjective. Seems kinda selfish really doesn't it..
IloveJesusYesId0 5 months ago
@IloveJesusYesId0 I think he's speaking to an issue that has yet still been ignored up unto this point. Some, and I'm not saying all, of the problems that physics is having is due to the stagnation of real progress for a steady pay check. Even if they know a theory has reached the end of its rope, like String Theory, because the money is in String Theory, they stay there and play with their thumbs. I think he's saying that a balanced like would lead to more progress in the field of physics.
MobiusCoin 4 months ago
@MobiusCoin String theory is insanity, gone so so so far without yet any way to prove anything. How about looking at quantum mechanics, something seems wrong with our basic understandings, it should tie in intimately to relativity and everything else.
Stepstoneau 3 months ago
@Stepstoneau String theory IS a relativistic quantum theory. It's just a relativistic quantum theory with a more general local SO(d - 1, 1) invariance than the SO(3, 1) Lorentz invariance of ordinary quantum field theory with point particles.
unhealthytruthseeker 3 months ago
This guy rocks!
MrThaipain 5 months ago
''...nature is intrinsically beautiful''
Error. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Personally I find mother nature to be one cruel hard bitch red in tooth and claw.
DerivedEnergy 6 months ago
@DerivedEnergy Nature loves... without pity. :)
oidni1 1 month ago
man, he really wants to fuck those beautiful mathematical particles
MrRevolutionmagic 6 months ago
the expansion of the universe DID point them to us...Galileo got a raw deal? Not really, he just got a B...I feel bad for experimental physicists and mathematicians...
creosoteweb 6 months ago
Comment removed
creosoteweb 6 months ago
This is an idea that has been proven and known to be wrong for a long time now
cloffff 6 months ago
@cloffff Sources?
Gytax0 6 months ago
@Gytax0 Sure. It violates the Coleman Mandula theorem, which is fatal by itself but moreover the E8 has no complex representations which are necessary to make a chiral gauge theory, like the standard model. If you want a very solid footnote look here, arxiv,org/abs/0905,2658 but you really dont even need this much text to establish it. You can also see a real physicist hopelessly trying to explain this in a comment debate here: bit,ly/prHAXR (change all the commas to dots in the links)
cloffff 6 months ago
This is in the book titled The Last Universe, which is a fictional story as well. It's exciting and interesting, flipping between the unbelievable and the completely reliable.
CatFlashBlue 7 months ago
I guess my biggest difficulty with this is the more-than-four dimensional requirements. I agree with the voices that argue that a thoroughly correct proposition will be expressible in four dimensions only. I can't really give a scientific proof for this, it's just intuitive. Again, my mind is no equal to those like Garret's! I, too, hope this theory is proven correct in concept.
djlivingfire 7 months ago
True, his assumption is a problem. But hopefully we'll know one way or the other soon enough. It would be great if this 'beautiful' concept was proved though. It makes more sense as a theory than any other I've heard.
chynes7 7 months ago
I think he's onto something, but he's wrong about all 248 generators being particles. Maybe reconsider particular subset(s) - there isn't room for functionality... all fermions have to come from eigenspace, which appears to be insufficient in this model.
djlivingfire 7 months ago
Thunbs up for Garrett's Shag Wagon!
randalcopeland 7 months ago
Perhapse even new attoms emerge from the continued disruption of the valences, and disruption of the polarity therin, because of the 8 dimentional rotation of the E8 as it redefines harmony with its surroundings. This is the foundation of physical evolution. Now, the hard part is discovering the quantum physics involving a non-physical existance...
randalcopeland 7 months ago
E8 is an evolutionary particle. It explains how a single particle can be everything. It is the universal particle which constructs everything. We just need the Higgs particle to finish the equation. The question is, if the particle can change its form, then all matter could transform itself into any compilation of existing matter or structure for that matter. When a chemical reaction happens, not only are the attoms exchanging anions and cations to form new molecules.
randalcopeland 7 months ago
The difference between Lisi's E8 theory and String theory is that he has testable hypotheses. He predicts the existence of new particles, many of which may emerge from LHC. String theory is currently just sexy math, with no hope of experimental confirmation in the foreseeable future.
goffperu 7 months ago
@goffperu lol, string theory is just "sexy math"
critesbill 7 months ago
@goffperu I doubt that he'll continue with the prediction of new particles. His assumption that all 248 generators are particles is just that - an assumption.
djlivingfire 7 months ago
@djlivingfire that's why it is called THEORY
TheProdigySupreme 7 months ago
@TheProdigySupreme Yeah you're right. I didn't mean to come off as a know it all. Garret's work is truly brilliant. I can't compete with this kind of work. I was actually stating this in defense of his position - to illustrate that just because the eigenspace is insufficient for the fermions if all the generators are particles doesn't mean his idea is a bust. Like I said I think he's clearly onto something here. I've been a big fan of geometric solutions ever since I read Bucky Fuller!
djlivingfire 7 months ago
@OldSchoolSkill I just hope this isnt the case of building maths to support your conclusion. He seems very grounded in this aspect, but temptation to make the picture work when its soooooooo close is soooooo strong. It is very compelling, Ive some Papers and Journals to read. String theory is sooo very elegant, but itseems to pop up 3 problems for every 1 or 2 solved. Its gonna be that way for this guy.
If it were easy, it'd been solved long, long ago..
painxtreme 7 months ago in playlist Project
The presenter has no idea what Lisi is talking about
McDrDoctor 7 months ago
this guy is amazing with maths. all hisz Differential Geometry and Topology is really amazingly difficult
McDrDoctor 7 months ago
You did not talk about the calcium carbonate chemical bonds involved in making of corals. Do you understand the chemistry of coral making crystallography of chemical bonding of carbonates?
giuseppe3010 8 months ago in playlist Science
@giuseppe3010 the video is about cutting-edge theoretical physics, not about the chemical bonds of coral. He uses coral as an analogy, but there is no need to go in-depth about coral when clearly that is not the focus of the talk.
Or did you just want to impress us with your fancy calcium carbonate chemical bond talk?
critesbill 7 months ago
@critesbill Yeah, right...bathroom singer, I wanted to impress only you !
giuseppe3010 7 months ago
We start with a joint!
Piitsi 8 months ago
We start with a joint
Piitsi 8 months ago 38
@OldSchoolSkill
You dont need the lottery!!first look for him and once you found him, give him what you can!! it's easy to say words like the lottery shit, act now if you believe in something!!!!!!
michelefezzi1 8 months ago
i like this. but it is hard to understand. i understood the concepts about the coral, but the particle patterns were confusing. is there another place this is talked about? i may just need another type of description...
jesscialynwarren 8 months ago
i dont understand it i wonder how many viewers actually understand this. informative nonetheless
DuMCommentaries 8 months ago
I love researching things like this and listening to people like Lisi, but I really have to wonder... how do people with such a remarkable level of intelligence look at the world, as opposed to most people of normal intelligence? I don't consider myself stupid by any means, but to compare my intellectual abilities to those of someone like Garrett Lisi is just ridiculous. But it's these rare gems of super intelligence that are required to keep moving our species forward. Best of luck to him.
TMusic5 9 months ago
@OldSchoolSkill I can't really comment on the hypothesis because I don't fully understand it, but the photos about his life felt just out of place in this lecture. I don't care about whether or not he lives his life like a 90s college movie.
EkorrenHJ 9 months ago
An object of possibilities !!
superdiza 9 months ago
Pretty pictures, but I want to see the equations!
mdiem 9 months ago
7889 8764 1826 9112 5321 3718
8988 8532 5628 1191 7641 1734
1918 3584 7348 1898 5146 1562
Figure this out and you'll know the secret.
dark243stone 9 months ago
@dark243stone Is that how many times your mom whacked you with a soup bone?
2eelShmeal 9 months ago
awesome theory
nobrainQQ 9 months ago
check out his paper on arXiv, exceptionally simple theory, its a top download
landwolf00 9 months ago
would like to hear an update pertaining to rumored new fifth force
CiiMONSTR 10 months ago
Some nice visualizations, but have no illusions: Garrett's "theory" is completely at odds with established physics. It has been debunked. Among other problems, it is unable to reproduce chirality. It is not "controversial" among people who understand how symmetry is implemented in physics.
cloffff 10 months ago
It's Shchiling-er goddamit!
EverybodyHeardMe 10 months ago
that's one beautiful mandala!
rogerpaul 10 months ago
You are my hero!
Xanzzu 11 months ago
Chris Anderson at 20:18-21:00 is like "What the hell is this dude talking about?"
Zotov13 11 months ago
@Zotov13
Yes. The completely dumbfounded expression was priceless.
mtszabo 10 months ago
lol At the end, he's asking Lisi for a shape of a particle (electron), but Lisi is saying each subatomic particle has a shape as defined by the E8 structure as it rotates...but also notes that subatomic particles are represented as points. If you're simple-minded, each particle (including the electron) is a point. If you want more clarity, watch the E8 rotation video on Wikipedia...under Exceptionally Simple (ToE). It's still a work-in-progress.
zeryphex 11 months ago
Cat's Schroedinger FTW..
batuhany 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
wow he was boring. didnt know how to speak
Kelertasable 1 year ago
wow he was boring. didnt know how to speak
Kelertasable 1 year ago
should have been done by a better speaker imo :)
JellouliS 1 year ago
I am surprised that I actually understand Lisi's grasphical explanation. It is a great video.
ibrremote 1 year ago
man this stuff is rly rly interesting... i can't w8 till im smart enough to understand it all xD
therealjordiano 1 year ago
@therealjordiano
wait until you're smart enough? You must have the intellectual capability, to understand this in the first place. Just study the symbols, watch lectures, in which it is explained in mathmatical form. Like Richard Feynmann said; there are no "wonder-people", you need to be very interested and very curious, then anyone can do these things. But not many people want to spend so much time on something they don't really like.
Jipzorowns 1 year ago
@Jipzorowns lol trust me, im doing my best to try and take this in... I haven't started uni yet, nor A-levels, so im used to the lower level stuff, I mean this stuff is really cool, It just confuses me more than anything really :|
therealjordiano 1 year ago
this guy inter-changed the role of cat and scientist (atleast schrodinger) .....
vadiethestar 1 year ago
The seal of Solomon. The Lotus. The sacred geometry.
I guess it would take a surfer to tie it all together.
preacherZer0 1 year ago
It seems really interesting, too bad I don't understand any of this dimension-spinning.
Estradarsaysmoo 1 year ago
we are a % of all ....everything
made of the universe we are... and nothing that isnt.....
:)
FinalPrison 1 year ago
bt sent me here
KVNWSHRE5 1 year ago
hmm boring... theories are so boring.
MrPilotans 1 year ago
Its all just cause and effect to me. Karma is all there is, was, or ever will be. Sustainability of the ecosystem is dependent on understanding this fact and the fact that everything effects and is dependent on everything else. Using simple physics is the key to a peaceful harmonious existence. This is what spiritual masters have been teaching for thousands of years.
justkarmatoo 1 year ago
i feel soooo stupid =(
Despotailustrado 1 year ago 2
How can you imagine a shape with 8 dimensions?
Most ppl, including myself, cannot even imagine 4.
pr4nk5tr 1 year ago
@pr4nk5tr If the fourth dimension is time, then you can do it easily. However if you take the 4th dimension as a space dimension (x, y, z, w) then you have a real problem. You can try to imagine a four dimensional cube by looking at projections into 3d from different angles (like shades of a wireframe cube on a piece of paper). Other than that the brain has no intrisic mechanism to imagine these things. With math you don't really need to... look at the equations =)
infinitehumanstupid 1 year ago
@pr4nk5tr You don't imagine a shape with eight dimensions. Quite literally, no human being will ever be able to see more than three dimensions. That's how the world has shaped our brains and evolution. We only require three dimensions, so we only see three dimensions.
But, seeing these extra dimensions isn't required in order to do the math. :)
MegaBlackDays 1 year ago
@MegaBlackDays
Aha!
So he mathematically rotates that E8 thing around in so and so many ways, and then discovers that it's equivalent to a certain atom?
Does he do that automatically with a computer, or is he just solving equations like a maniac the whole day?
pr4nk5tr 1 year ago
Great stuff... But dude, it's TED, can't you, memorize, your speech?
harryfmk 1 year ago
Strange if the standard model is broken,then maybe this model is just that to and should have been accepted.Since we are E8 but in stringtheory was created by a collision of branes(universa) maybe our E8 has collided or are sharing its particle that our imagineless scientist denys with a another E-shape thus rendering the missing partical's invinsible and impossible to us to detect.
Qulopuaa 1 year ago
he cannot explain what the theory of everything is! but he is cute....
woshy0 1 year ago
@woshy0 I think he just did. Pretty much his entire talk was explaining this theory.
You must have a short memory, or I must have misunderstood you.
MegaBlackDays 1 year ago
This reminds me of my college physics labs. We'd do something crazy like calculate the mass of the earth using calculus and then verify it with some crazy experiment.
danthemanvsqz 1 year ago
I must say, many of the people on TED (especially those about science), makes me feel stupid.
Ko252 1 year ago
More people should watch videos like this. This stuff is so interesting and I'm only 16. Garrett Lisi is very smart.
FreeTunes498 1 year ago
Smart, broke, ain't givin' a shit, and love it.
LovelyYTRocks 1 year ago
I haven't watched this video yet for my own personal reasons, but I have a question.
The screen at 00:24, what are those equations at the bottom? Can those equations be recognized as a significant part of this theory? Because they would look good on my arm.
As tattoos.
ElxCarlito 1 year ago
And by significant I mean is it worth to tattoo only a portion of this theory instead of the whole ####ing thing?
Hopefully he's right lol
ElxCarlito 1 year ago
Where is the "My brain just came" button?
migduh 1 year ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
Thousands of profiles for girl naneedj.info
madawimadara 1 year ago
Comment removed
Marqan 1 year ago
When I was 20 I knew intuitively that time is not part of space. It took me 32 years to understand rationally that according to mathematical formalism X4 = ict time is numerical order of photon motion in 4D space.
TimeEinstein 1 year ago
i love this guy... great roll model...of how live can be lived....
this guy schould be on the milk bottles instead of some foodball player....
that makes miljions with doing nothing for humanity....
opiated666 1 year ago
Comment removed
seekhtruth 1 year ago
Perhaps the reason this Big Bang Theory is so widely held is because it does conjure up so many abstract theorys trying to explain it,when filamentary theory is a relatively simple process of particle collision and radiation creating magnetic fields of fusion.Think about it, im a physicist and me or one of my colleagues has finally figured out the Grand Theory of Everything.yay,Nobel prize,party!,now what?
Aspanaut 1 year ago
I beleive life can only exist on a planet if the amount of electromagnetivity its getting, based on its position in the stars magnetic field,allows for all three elementary forms to exist;gas,liquid,and solid or where they all fit in evenly
Aspanaut 1 year ago
The leftover elements then relatively quickly get caught in the magnetic fields of newly forming stars whilse being pulled toward the galaxy's SMBH the amount of radiation however would not allow these elements to actually enter the black hole.The collision points of these atoms with the radiation from the star would cause planets to form.And if these molecules form the rite densitys based on how much solar radiation they receive,they start life
Aspanaut 1 year ago
Then when the star reaches the end of its galactic arm the magnetic field collapses while its new neutron infused atoms are blasted into and held in the magnetic field because of their neutrons,these are the other elements.As the stars magnetic field collapses it immediately begins fusing the electrons with the particles and becomes a quasar(protogalaxy) repeating the eternal process.
Aspanaut 1 year ago
i personally beleive in a universe where particales(dark matter)lol are colliding at a point between 3 seperate voids producing electrons(radiation) which immedately collide with and condense incoming particles from the void into pools of H1 which immedately start emitting radiation from the friction of colliding Protons & Electrons in their black holes,the outgoing radiation then collides and fuses with incoming H1 creating stars.These star then create their own magnetic fields(gravity)
Aspanaut 1 year ago
lol physics through a kaleidoscope
Kebabsoup 1 year ago
This is the first I've heard about this theory. Very intriguing. I've heard much more about Superstring theory but immediately this one makes more sense to me.
MobiusCoin 1 year ago
What I got from this was that all these particles are kind of like on a big die and depending how it is rolled we see what lands on top. who is rolling the die?
BillKolaski 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@BillKolaski
Certainly not God!
ljloughl 1 year ago
felt very blessed to watch this presentation
we're not what we're fully employed (or not)
grasssmile 1 year ago
very interesting,maybe i misunderstood .at the end it seemed like he just repeated what einstien said about space being nothing and this nothing has a geometric shape that can be bent curved and warped?thereby giving rise to the universe and all the forces and particles that comprise our existence.dosen,t getting somthing from nothing violate all known laws of physics?
robert66michel 1 year ago
within first minute global warming myth.lol
oitor 1 year ago
believe I know something about this anomaly and its known as quantum weirdness. Energy is propagated through space as a wave and a particle depending upon which way an observer views it. Its as if one's way of observing something effects its property. I will look up this subject " wave particle duality" and see if it clarifies things for me since I'm a bit at a loss understanding this concept.
MALCOLMACDOO 1 year ago
"After admonishing us for turning the temperature up too high"
Heh
tipoomaster 1 year ago 15
Growing coral? As in particles appearing and disappearing? From other universes?
Hmmm
nellre 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Over 4 Million members benaughtyman.info
ghgfjfhgbfhgfj 1 year ago
Regardless of the E8 theory being valid or not, this was a beautifull talk with a great simplifying visualization of mindblowing complex mathematics. I'm not that great at math myself, and the most complex things i've been working with has been 5-dimentional, which is great fun when you can visualize with graphs or diagrams in multidimentional space.
When i get actual formal competence in the fields i've been playing with, i hope i'll have a greater understanding and appreciation of it.
gulllars 1 year ago 2
Interesting but this guy is not a good speaker. I don't like how he reads and he shouldn't actually read. None of those physicist who explain things on youtube read.
GShock112 1 year ago
@GShock112 Imagine standing in front of not only scientific peers, but the world on camera and probably given instructions to make the speech reasonably simple, would you be nervous if your not a natural speaker? I would be....
I think he does a good job of "simplifying" as good as he can to dumb it down for the general net populous.
Baldwynmayhem 1 year ago 2
@Baldwynmayhem
Oh but I understand I didn't say he's not a good teacher I said he's not a good speecher. Besides he really reads too fast. He has a plan but he doesn't seem to look at the audience's faces to find out whether they understand him or not... he just follows his written plan. The theory is incredibly nice but you know... we're getting to the point of nowhere IMO. We need scientific experiments to prove theories.
GShock112 1 year ago
@GShock112 definitely mate for sure agreed, it'll happen ;)
Baldwynmayhem 1 year ago
i wonder what his archivement is: was he the frist to apply E8 to elementary particles? or has he only done the part with the colourful circles, triangles, squares and the projection of E8 roots?
trueamerica911 1 year ago
Garrett!! That was absolutely amazing!!!!!!
donskills 1 year ago
nice little theory to start the day with!
gocy 1 year ago
To me applying particles to E8 is like trying to make an argument for the square tire. Sure, you could make one, and it might work, but not nearly as well as the round ones. Think I'll stick with the round ones. Lee Smolin is an embarassing scientist for having endorsed this.
carlmelanson1 1 year ago
@carlmelanson1
Can you explain what some of the flaws of his theory are?
AdamLore 10 months ago
fractals for life... fucking genius
nggrhntr 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Online Asian girls #lushfmlk.info#
akikohannri 1 year ago
Why cant we mix this theory with the string theory?
BataFatCat 1 year ago 15
@BataFatCat i'll proof that string theory and E8 ar just diferent representation of the same theorie :D
trueamerica911 1 year ago
@BataFatCat Good question, I have been wondering the same thing (of course, I don't have a background in physics).
midnightmurphy 1 year ago
@BataFatCat I was thinking about your question. This theory deals with elementry particles... the building blocks of matter...but since the particles are invisible they are portrayed as shapes and colors as representation of those particles. This theory uses various shapes and colors to describe whats happening at a quantum level. But string theory uses vibrations of a string to describe whats happening at a quantum level. maybe both theories are compatible one using shape/color the other sound
MALCOLMACDOO 1 year ago
@BataFatCat
His hypothetical model -- not a theory, as falsely labeled -- was refuted by two physicists in early 2010. This is a dead end. This guy can sell books though. There are enough retarded people to buy them.
LogicalFlawDetector 1 year ago
@LogicalFlawDetector
cite your sources, link to the paper refuting this would be interesting
rbogart123 1 year ago
@rbogart123 sciencedaily com/releases/2010/03/100326132341.htm
slovakmath 1 year ago
@slovakmath Broken link.
zzzIdividedbyzerozzz 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@zzzIdividedbyzerozzz o yeah... sorry. I didn't want to be accused of spam...just replace the space between sciencedaily and com with a period...here it is correctly:
sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/03/100326132341.htm
slovakmath 1 year ago
@zzzIdividedbyzerozzz ok youtube wont let me post the link so just google exactly this phrase to read the article:
No 'Simple Theory of Everything' Inside the Enigmatic E8, Researcher Says
It will be the first google response, an article at sciencedaily
slovakmath 1 year ago
@slovakmath Thank you, much helpful.
zzzIdividedbyzerozzz 1 year ago
@LogicalFlawDetector Why is it wrong?
AlohaBay 1 year ago
@LogicalFlawDetector i thought it was one mathematician Skip Garibaldi who did the refutation. its trivial to argue this point but I do think credit it due where deserved. please tell me the name of the physicists who also did this, I want to read their paper
slovakmath 1 year ago
@BataFatCat one theory that is incomplete and another that is wrong, dont mix easily
slovakmath 1 year ago
@BataFatCat They may be different at a fundamental level.
AlohaBay 1 year ago
@BataFatCat . Same reason why they can't mix religion with science. Because people don't want to. people can't understand that there are different paths to the truth. And maybe they will all go to the same spot at the end, they only take a different way. Im a religious Scientist. People think its stupid and that it cannot be put together. Everything is possible and nothing can happen. Only we humans are too ignorant.
I love the reaction i will get :)
Zeharit 1 year ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
@Zeharit
"people can't understand that there are different paths to the truth."
Because there aren't. Religion leads nowhere. It's a dead end.
MomoTheBellyDancer 1 year ago
@Zeharit love your point of view, really humans are to ignorant.
loweyesguy831 1 year ago
@Zeharit God created the evolution !
nexenta 1 year ago
@nexenta It almost reads as you're trying to claim that god; an unproven concept that is found in the most primitive societies (which BTW people who believe in the existents of such a mythical creature, can't even define it consistently). This god thing, is somehow responsible to the process that created the diversity of life on earth?
Go to church (or madhouse your choice) and stop bothering us with this nonsense.
agetahon 1 year ago
@Zeharit Religion and science is like going to AA and after that to the bar. =D You can't be truly scientific, and religious... at most agnostic (of course I thought that your religion is based on some superstitious beings or garden gnomes or some other Zeus like figure).
infinitehumanstupid 1 year ago